Chasodim Inc Co Yehuda Greenstein

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454204846
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Monsey, NY, USA
Phone
3472365881
Rating
47
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Personal Social Services
Affiliation
Judaism

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,250
Expenses
$2,566
Assets
$1,800
Liabilities
$1,256

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • YEHUDA GREENSTEIN (Director)
  • ABRAHAM FRANK (Director)
  • HERSHEL GRUNBAUM (Director)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

CHASODIM, INC. is an organization created to establish a network of care to benefit the members of the Jewish community in Rockland County and the surrounding areas by providing information regarding the availability of; emergency services that provide financial assistance to help offset the costs of medical expenses and for other emergency situations; to disseminate information regarding the location and availability of adequate health care; to provide aid and assistance in filling out job applications, credit applications and lease agreements; to offer aid and assistance to the poor and needy through the collection and dissemination of food, clothing and other items; to conduct and organize meetings, discussions and forums to consider community opinions on issues affecting needy individuals and their families.

What it reported doing in 2015

CHASODIM, INC. is an organization created to establish a network of care to benefit the members of the Jewish community in Rockland County and the surrounding areas. The organization provides information regarding the availability of assistance for emergency services, financial aid, medical care, temporary housing and other emergent situations. The organization disseminates information regarding the location and availability of services for needy and indigent individuals in the community. The organization itself does not provide these services but serves as a referral network for those individuals who need such services. All funds contributed to this organization will be used to operate the hotline and overhead costs in maintaining this organization. All members of the organization are on a volunteer basis that help compile the information regarding available services and disseminate it to those in need

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 38
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45.1%; rating input score 45
  • Program expense ratio: 39.6%; rating input score 40
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -14%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.7; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.7; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 150% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -23.3% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -16.9% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45.1% of revenue deployed · 39.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2013 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 45/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.